JENNIE MAE ATWOOD, APPELLANT,
v.
FLOYD W. MCRAE, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's orders due to an equal division among the justices, establishing a precedent for affirming decrees when the court is equally divided.
Yes, when the members of the Supreme Court are equally divided in opinion and there is no prospect of immediate change in the court's personnel, the decree should be affirmed.
“When the members of the Supreme Court are sitting six members in a body and after full consultation, it appears that the members of the court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether the decree should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the personnel of the court, the decree should be affirmed”
This quote explains the rule applied by the court when justices are equally divided.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involved appeals of orders from the Circuit Court. The Florida Supreme Court, consisting of six justices, was equally divided in its opinion …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
In this case Mr. Chief Justice Buford, Mr. Justice Whitfield and Mr. Justice Brown are of opinion that the orders of the Circuit Court should be affirmed while Mr. Justice Ellis, Mr. Justice Terrell and Mr. Justice Davis are of opinion that the orders should be reversed. "When the members of the Supreme Court are sitting six members in a body and after full consultation, it appears that the members of the court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether the decree should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the personnel of the court, the decree should be affirmed; therefore it is considered, ordered and adjudged under the authority of State ex rel. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 37 South. Rep. 51, that the decree of the Circuit Court in this cause be and the same is hereby affirmed.
Buford, C.J., and Wi-iitfield, Ellis, Terrell, Brown and Davis, J.J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (25 total)
-
Effie Smith Nichols v. Bodenwein, 107 Fla. 25 (Fla. 1932)…o't appear that complainants had obtained a judgment at law, or that a suit at law instituted by them was pending against the defendants, or any of them. Sec. 5035, Compiled General Laws, 1927; B. L. E. Realty Co. vs. Mary William Co., 101 Fla. 254, 134 So. 47. See also George E. Sebring Co. vs. O’Rourke, 101 Fla. 885, 134 So. 556; Willis vs. Fowler, 102 Fla. 35, 136 So. 358. Under the pleadings a rescission of the contracts and cancellation of the notes given by Effie Smith Nichols must be justified, ei…
-
Dixie Music Co., Inc. v. Pike, 135 Fla. 671 (Fla. 1938)…uch result.’ Godwin v. Phifer, 51 Fla. 441, 41 So. 597, 600, and other cases cited therein.” See also in this connection Town of North Miami v. Travis & Co., 118 Fla. 879, 160 So. 360; B. L. E. Realty Corporation v. Mary Williams Co., 101 Fla. 254, 134 So. 47; Gillespie v. Chapline, 59 Fla. 500, 52 So. 722; Builders Supply Co. v. Acton, 56 Fla. 756, 47 So. 822. The bill of complaint is not sworn to. However, L. J. Cushman, attorney for plaintiff, appended to the bill his affidavit, as to the necessity f…
-
Stewart v. Manget, 132 Fla. 498 (Fla. 1938)…n equitable execution because execution at law cannot be had. Armour Fertilizer Works v. First National Bank of Brooksville, 87 Fla. 436, 100 So. 362, and authorities there collected and cited; B. L. E. Realty Co. v. Mary Williams Co., 100 Fla. 254, 134 So. 47; Bean v. First National Bank of Clearwater, 102 Fla. 367, 135 So. 803; Bay View Estates Corp. v. Southerland, 114 Fla. 635, 154 So. 894; Hillsborough County v. Dickenson, 125 Fla. 181, 169 So. 734. • The prevailing rule is that before a creditor ca…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 25 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- The State of Fla. ex rel. Hiram J. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224 (Fla. 1904)